Dear Mr Kalsi

Dear Mr Kalsi

I borrowed your book Beej Mantra Philosophy from S Gurmit Singh and have gone through it. I have some questions in mind. It will be great if you can answer to clarify these doubts.

1 In what way the change of pronunciation of Ikomkar to Ikooo will enhance our understanding of Gurbani. At the end of the day the meaning of both these words boils down to oneness of God. It will be great if you can quote some verses from SGGS underlining the way it changes the meaning if we pronounce this word as Ikoo or Ikomkar.

2 Prof Sahib Singh (who has been clubbed together with persons like Sant Sunder Singh and Yogi Harbhajan Singh in your dedication message at the start of the book) has interpreted this word as Ikomkar. In his opinion the open end to the Oora is the suffix from Sanskrit language pronounced as Kaar. This is a linguistic question and we all know and respect Prof Sahib Singh for his knowledge in this field. Apparently his interpretation of open end of Oora is based on this knowledge. Do you have any logical linguistic argument to dispute or refute this assertion of Prof Sahib Singh. You have not given any such argument in the book.

2 You are saying that the pronunciation ikomkar suggests that our Gurus were following the philosophy of Vedas (as omkar is a Sanskrit word, the language of Vedas) while in actual fact our Gurus have rejected this philosophy. You have quoted many verses from Gurbani to support you view that SGGS rejects Vedas. There is no denying the fact that our Gurus have rejected the philosophy of Vedas, but it is silly to suggest that if we pronounce the opening word as Ikomkar then it means that our Gurus followed the Vedas. Our Gurus rejected the philosophy of Vedas not the language of Vedas. Sanskrit has a place in SGGS as a language. Interestingly the language of your book is also not pure Punjabi but a Sanskritized Punjabi. You start you logic with a Sanskritized expression by describing Ikomkar alias Ikoo as Anirvachanyee or inexplicable. You could have used the word Alakh for this expression as used by our Gurus many times in SGGS. I am not criticizing your style or language. But as they say style is the man.

3 You seem to suggest that Ikomkar alias Ikoo is a unique Mantra. Here you display a total misunderstanding of the concept of Manter in SGGS and trying to impose the concept of Mantra as described in Vedas on Gurbani. Manter in Gurbani means the teachings of Guru and not a magic word for incessant repetition or a set of words to invoke magical powers for gain or harm.

4 You are saying that Ikoo alias Ikomkar is unique word created by Guru Nanak. This is his great blessing on the Sikhs and mankind. Then how come we find that its shape and style has been changed by subsequent Gurus and others. You have given different shapes at page 34-35 of your book. No one should be allowed to play with the style and shape of this unique word or letter as you would like to call it.

5 You are asserting that this is unique one word referred to as all important Ek Akhar or one word in SGGS. Do you find any hint anywhere in SGGS to support this. Our Guru would not miss such an important thing while composing SGGS.

6 You are saying that Guru Arjan Dev has given enough hints in SGGS for pronunciation of M 1-5 as mahla first to five but he has not given any hint to pronounce ikomkar as ikomkar. But the question is did he ask us to pronounce it as Ikoo?

7 What is your logic to treat Ikoo as a letter instead of word? Is it not just to make it fit in your argument of that unique Ek Akhar the one letter referred to in SGGS?

8 Kabeer also refers to this illusive one word or Ek Akhar in his verses. You have quoted Kabeer to this effect in your book. If this Ek Akhar is Ikoo and this has been created by Guru Naank then what does Kabeer refers to in his verses. We all know that Kabeer was a predecessor of Guru Nanak.

9 What is your logic to treat Ikomkar alias Ikoo as noun instead of adjective.

10 What is your logic to treat Ikomkar alias Ikoo as a super special name for God. It is not like Muslims who say that God has many names but his primary name is Allah. Moreover are you not contradicting the basic principal of Gurbani that God does not have a name even though we remember him with many names?

11 Your assertion of correcting the meaning of Ikomkar alias Ikoo by tanking it out of the context of Vedas and placing it in the context of the illusive One Word is only a camouflage. In actual fact the impression one gets after finishing reading your book is that you support the philosophy of Vedas. You have heavily quoted from Dasam Granth which propounds the philosophy of Vedas and Shastras. You are trying to convert the opening word of SGGS into a Mantra which is a tribute to the kind of Sikhism preached by Yogi Harbhajan Singh. No wonder he is the one who inspired you to write this book.

12 I am also surprised at the translation of Beej Manter to Seed Mantra. Seed is only the literal translation of Punjabi word Beej and you have changed Manter to Mantra giving it a more Sanskritized look. There are better translations out there. For example Seminal Teaching conveys much better sense. This also reveals your intellectual leanings.

I hope you won’t mind this plain talking from an ordinary Sikh and will find some time to clarify these doubts.

Thanks and regards

Jarnail Singh

16/06/2007

received on 25.06.07

Rejoinder to Ikomkar alias =

Satkārjog Jarnail Singh Jee, Wāhiguru Jī Kā Khālsā, Wāhiguru Jī Kī Fateh.

To the counterfeit one calls the genuine,

and the worth of genuine, one knows not. (AGGS, P. 229)

Firstly, the gamut of your whole writing appears spoon-fed on Hindu Mythology and is full of Sophism. Secondly, you might have a cursory glance on a few pages of the book, but it does not seem that you have perused the book from start to end and have grasped the topic. Thirdly, your queries are based upon your own irrationally old-built Vedanta en-grams. Fourthly, you have neither quoted any statement of the book nor of Gurbānī to base your questions to be asked from the author. If you are sincere in asking the questions from the author, then read the whole book closely, quote the statements from the book, then frame your questions. The author will be pleased to answer you. So, please read the book meticulously and thoughtfully to grasp this new topic. Read chapter two “For Reader’s Consideration” where the guide lines to understand this kind of thesis, which is unheard of and undreamt of in the existing literature, have been clearly laid down.

It is a humble request to the readers, if they cannot understand the topic of any book, they should not mislead the other readers by sending such e-mails to others. The reader should exchange his views first with the author to dispel his doubts.

The Queries are 13 in number, not 12. There is a repetition of No. 2. So, the answers are 13 in number.

The first and foremost thing to notice in the Preface on page xviii, is: “Guru Nanak has revealed a unique depiction of God through Beej Mańtrā å, which has no relation with Mańtrās of the Vedās.”…

Query No.1. First of all your pronunciation of å, is “Ikomkar” [Ik Om Kar] which overtly shows that you are not assenting to the Sikh Panth’s prevalent pronunciation of lk Oankār. You have split å into three sepments. Would you explain how and why? How did you choose “Ikomkar” and where from? You are overwhelmed by Veda Shāstrās, not the author. Will the scholars or you show; where is Oankār written with å, which is brought forth in the Pronunciation of it? Twenty-one examples of pronunciations of å in Chapter six; and Gurus’ Authentic Forms of å in Chapter eight can be seen in the books titled “ONLY ONE GOD PHILOSOPHY” and “Beej Mańtar Darshan” by Nirmal Singh Kalsi. The readers must remember that the Shāstrī Scholars have distorted the pronunciation, meaning and authentic form of å to å, in which, unfortunately, the modern AGGSs’ are being published. The Sikh Scholars split å into three segments as lk + Oan +kār (iek + EAM + kwr = iek EAMkwr), and thus they correlate it to the Veda Shāstrās.

The change of pronunciation of “your Ikomkar” to å (=) definitely enhances our understanding of Gurbānī. If an Engineer is working on a machine, he will be called machinist; if he teaches, he is called a teacher, and so on. Person is the same, but his designation changes with his phase of work. For the sake of explanation, remember, that the author is using Oankār, which occurs in Gurbānī instead of your Omkar, which exists nowhere. You are the first Gursikh the author has come to know, who pronounces “Ikomkar”. It was definitely heard from non-Gursikhs or naïve Sikhs.

Read Chapter 22 and see the diagram of Divine Expansion. Oankār is the Creative Activity Field Aspect of å (= ). No doubt, Infinite are His Aspects, His Facets, His Virtues, but Six exhibited Aspects from edifying Gurbani can obviously be seen above Oankār, namely, Shabd Dhuni, Ekankār, Shabd (Unstruck Melody), Naam, Hukam, Nirankār, in DIVINE EXPANSION shown in Chapter 22 on page 137 of the book. Having seen the diagram, if the scholars are still adamant not to accept the hard facts and truth and refuse to trust their eyes, mentations and authenticity of Gurbānī; then this indicates enslavement to the power of Brahminical traditions. Moreover, they are blaspheming and belittling the import of “å ” when pronouncing it IK Oankār. If the reader cannot distinguish and understand between two side-by-side drawn unequal parallel lines i.e., one short and the other longer line of comparison, then, it is not the fault of the author. God bless him! Even an ordinary man can see the difference of å (= ) and Oankār in the diagram. (Vide the diagram on website: www.onlyonegod.ca ) Bānī clarifies:

eykY prgt eykY gupqw eykY DuMDUUkwrY]

Awid miD AMiq pRBu soeI khu nwnk swcu bIcwrY] (m: 5, pMnw 1215)

gur prmysr jwxIAY scy scw nwau DrwieAw[

inrMkwru Akwru hoie eykMkwru Apwru sdwieAw[

eykMkwrhu Sbd Duin EAMkwir Akwru bxwieAw[ (Bw: gurdws, vwr 26, pauVI 2)

All the Sikhs pray day and night, individually and in the Gurdwaras that, “O lord, forgive us for any error or omission or increase-decrease of any letter and vowel-point in the recitation of Gurbānī ”. How these scholars are taking the liberty of adding “Oankār (EAMkwr) to the pronunciation of å ? Is it not an infringement of the Gurus’ Hukam, blasphemy and distortion of Gurbānī? The scholars must understand that “Oankār (EAMkwr )” is written with open Ūrā “E ”, not with the unique vocable “” which is inseparable suffix to “1” as å, and it always graces in the inceptions of invocations and nowhere else. Moreover, vocable “” neither occurs anywhere alone, nor it is found in any Alphabetical tables, nor it comes in reading or writing alone. How are the scholars converting this Unique Vocable into “Oankār”? Oankār considered as the name of God occurs in Mundukya Upanishad, which belongs to the Hindu religion. That is why Sikhs are being labeled Kesāndhāree Hindus, because Gurū Nanak’s Unique Ideology of Only One God (without a Second) is adjoined to Brahminical traditions and religion. It is reiterated, Gurū Nānak, though born in Hindu family, rejected all the essentials of Hinduism and the moral authority of Hindu Scriptures. It must be remembered that Beej Mańtar å has no relation with the Mańtrās of the Vedās, Shātrās, Upanishads, etc.

Query No. 2 – Sri Maan Jarnail Singh Jee, read “Forward” on page xiii, Chapters 24 and 29, you will find logical linguistic argument to dispute or refute Professor Sahib Singh ‘s name with other scholars.

Query No. 3 – You say that the language of the Vedas has been rejected. Please quote the statement from the books. Here, you are presenting the distortion of Gurus message and the writing of the books in your own coined words. Our Gurus have not followed Vedas, nor the books say so, but it is you who is bound in the clutches of Hindu Mythology. Guru Jee has expounded and propounded the Message of Oneness of God that goes beyond Veda Shāstrās and other Scriptures. You say that the book is not in pure Punjabi, but a Sanskritized Punjabi. Would you give any example of a book written in pure Punjabi? Do you know how many languages are in our AGGS? The exegetes mention twenty-two Languages in AGGS. Would you explain why are you so much against the language of Sanskrit? Did you ever see Guru Arjan Dev Jee’s Salok Sahaskriti and Gāthā in Aad Guru Granth Sahib? Etymologically, Sahaskriti is the simplified derivative of Sanskrit, In other words Sanskrit Language is the etymon of Sahaskriti. Language. Hence, Sanskritized Gurbānī is there. It means you are against the Gurus and Gurbānī as well. Why are you disgruntled with the language of Sanskrit? Is the English not a foreign Language, which you read, write and speak? Gurbānī says:

gur mMqR hIxsu jo pRwxI, iDRgMq jnm BRstxh ] kUkrh sUkrh, grDvh kwkh srpn quil Klh ]33] (pMnw 1357)

mMqMR rwm nwmM, DHwnM srbqR pUrnh ]…]40] (pMnw 1357)

Query No. 4 – Sri Maan Jee, Chapters 4 and 5 fully explain what Mańtrās mean in Gurbānī. Read them, understand them; and don’t mislead the readers.

Query No. 5 and 6 – Yes, å (= ) is a Unique Word. It is a One Word, not two or three words. Understand what has been explained in query No. 1. No one is supposed to add Oankār in the pronunciation of å (= ). The books are full of quotations. The authors should be asked questions with logical and authentic statements.

Query No. 7 -- Read Chapters 3, and 6 on page 33, the answer to your question is there.